Bit of a sense of humour failure, Multz? Anyway, at least we agree that she's a weirdo.
To be clear, I'm not opposed to schools choosing to have a uniform policy if they wish, or to parents being able to choose to enrol their children in schools or other institutions whose uniform policy, rules or culture they find appealing (even if I find them repugnant). I do think that it shouldn't be acceptable for state schools to have gendered uniform rules (producing gendered subjects is still one of its main functions, IMO, and it's interesting how some criticisms of the way children dress upthread are focused on the traditional sexualised complaints about girls wearing short skirts or tight trousers) to punish children disproportionately for minor transgressions, or to fail to accommodate reasonable attempts to comply with rules according to the means of parents.
A politics based on social mobility is going to have very different educational ideals than a politics based on social transformation or class liberation. That's not a problem, but as schooling is compulsory and most children attend schools based on mundane criteria such as proximity rather than some sort of ideological matching, schools need to be sufficiently flexible to accommodate children (and their parents) whose modes of being are not gratuitously disruptive but represent a minor challenge to their ethos, or what they claim is their ethos. Schools who claim to value smartness or pride in appearance quite frequently punish children who demonstrably have those values but deviate from the school's preferred aesthetic, which suggests to me that the smartness thing is mainly a proxy for conformity.
